Jane’s Information Group, and a whole bunch of other sites, have “found” a new, large launch complex in Iran that is close to the rather spartan launch pad for the Safir. What is irksome (at least to me) is that the new launch complex is visible in Google Earth images dating back a year ago. This allows some interesting estimates for when the Simorgh project started, how much importance Iran assigns it, and when the new rocket might be launched (a lot sooner than some of us suspected). Here are two Google Earth images dating from 1 March 20010 2009 (typo!) and 9 October 2009. Nothing is visible at the site on 25 February 2005 so all this work is relatively recently. Iran is so active!
In Fars interview with Mr.Samkhani (former defence minister) he told the news agency that all of space and military projects shown off since five years ago have started when he was in the office.
The new launch complex is known for long time Iran space and missiles “Aficionados”.There are some pictures by the Israeli satellite EROS B, of Semnan facilities, from May and November 2009, so one can add them to the time line of the NK style launch complex.
here they are:
http://www.defense-update.com/photos/semnan_space_center_021209.html
Also of interest, is the fact that in contrast to the Safir ground section, which was constructed in delay relatively to the missile, the new launch complex is being built hand in hand with the Simurgh. A test launch THIS SUMMER would not be impossible, in my view.
There’s also a non-trivial facility being built between the new pad and the Safir pad, at 35.2445 N, 53.9350 E. An assembly building???
Geoff,
1 March 20010 should be 1 March 2009.
Just a small epistemological riff off Tal Inbar’s note that the new pad was reported on 2 Dec 2009 in
http://www.defense-update.com/photos/semnan_space_center_021209.html
I’ve checked around and, as far as I can tell, the only people who picked up on that, or at least who said anything about it, were the Freepers and some like-minded folks.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2401923/posts
Why wasn’t this development more widely known/discussed at the time, now three months ago?
The building Allen points out on the road to the new pad doesn’t seem to be a good full vehicle assembly building candidate – it’s not long enough (22 m long v 27 m for Simurgh), and the turn coming out of that facility onto its access road seems too tight for a 27 m long trailer + tractor, though one could expand the turning radius later in construction…
If the Simurgh first stage were the largest assembled unit there, that might fit. Stacking the second stage on pad is not abnormal in spaceflight launch vehicle operations.
It is a unusually secure facility, with the separate wall and gate.
> The building Allen points out on the road to the new pad doesn’t seem to be a good full vehicle assembly building candidate…
Payload preparation perhaps? IIRC the NRO had a secure Shuttle payload facility at Cape Canaveral.
Addendum:
I was assuming the Simurgh is assembled horizontally. If it’s assembled vertically and Allen’s new building is the foundation for a tall VAB then it’s big enough. I don’t think we have any evidence for a vertical assembly and transporter – and Iran only does horizontal to date – but it’s well enough known to be another credible path.
Allen writes:
Why wasn’t this development more widely known/discussed at the time, now three months ago?
This happens all the time to intelligence agencies; why would the “open source” community here be any different?
Making matters worse… There aren’t really that many of us, we have finite hours in the day, and we’re not getting paid to spend all our time reviewing the complete open source data set looking for new developments. With all of North Korea, Iran, Syria, Myanmar, and to a lesser degree the more open nuclear powers and everyone else on our plates, there’s a lot for us to be trying to keep an eye on.
It sort of rubs salt in the wound that it was the Free Republic that noticed; but in general it’s useful foreign intelligence signal to noise ratio approaches zero, so it’s not worth following with that goal in mind.
There have been two reports in Jane’s publications so far. The first was in Jane’s Missiles and Rockets. This was followed by what was essentially a cut-down version in Jane’s Defence Weekly. Apparently a third article covering the Simorgh 3 and its possible links with North Korea is being prepared by Jane’s Intelligence Review.
Jane’s makes no claim to have found the site; this may be an analysis job whose publication was triggered by the unveiling of Iraq’s Simorgh 3 SLV, which was also the subject of a separate article in Jane’s Missiles and Rockets.
Their image is from the DigiGlobe WorldView-1 satellite and was taken on February 6. It shows the site at a more advanced stage of construction that the Google Earth images shown on ArmsControl Wonk.
Some key points from their analysis:
The layout of the site shows that many new buildings are in close proximity to the new pad. Although this might suggest that the new pad is a test stand for engines or complete first-stage vehicles rather than a launch facility, a search of the general area has shown no signs of what could be a launch pad under construction.
The dimensions of the apron, pad and tower would be suitable for a vehicle of about 2.5 m diameter, but a two-stage Simorgh 3 would need a tower of about half as tall again as the current height (which may not represent the full height planned for what could be an initial stage of operations.
The only building in a position to be the control room is an above-ground construction that seems uncomfortably close to the pad. An earth excavation for what could become an underground control room is located further from the pad.
Two large buildings are being built about 250 m from the pad. One is a possible vehicle checkout and integration building. Another cluster of buildings even further from the pad are identified as being either related to the construction work or having been built as a possible administrative facility.
The ‘non-trivial facility’ mentioned by Allen Thomson shows partially underground construction. This, and the obvious security features caused it to be identified as a possible munitions-storage facility.
The general state of the site and the rate of progress makes it unlikely that operations are unlikely to begin until late this year, or some time in 2011.